Rowland, A

English

University of Salford Institutional Repository

1/6/2020 Modern Slavery Bill (2nd September 2014)https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmpublic/modernslavery/memo/ms05.htm 1/4AccessibilityCookiesEmail alertsRSS feedsContact usSite searchSite search1. Search SearchPrimary navigationHomeParliamentary businessMPs, Lords & officesAbout ParliamentGet involvedVisitingEducationHouse of CommonsHouse of LordsWhat's onBills & legislationCommitteesPublications & recordsParliament TVNewsTopicsYou are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Hansard >Commons Debates > Public Bill Committee Debates > Public Bill CommitteeSession 2014-15 Modern Slavery BillWritten evidence submitted by Dr Andrew Rowland (MS 05)1.0 SUMMARY1.1 Turning something as important as child trafficking and exploitation into a headline-grabbing piece oflegislation, by using the emotive term ‘slavery’, is only appropriate if the substance of that legislation iscomprehensive enough, and detailed enough, to really make a difference to the people it is designed toprotect whether through punishment of offenders or prevention of offences. In its current form the ModernSlavery Bill 2014 lacks that detail in some places and it is beholden upon everyone involved in ourparliamentary processes to make the changes I believe are necessary to improve it into powerful primary1/6/2020 Modern Slavery Bill (2nd September 2014)https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmpublic/modernslavery/memo/ms05.htm 2/4legislation that will be more likely to better protect children from exploitation and trafficking, andappropriately punish those people responsible for these heinous crimes against society.2.0 TITLE2.1 In order to make absolutely clear that this Bill is not just about "Slavery" (which is an emotive term andwhich is inadequately defined in the Bill) the title ought to be changed to:2.1.1 "Human Trafficking, Exploitation and Modern Slavery Bill"2.2 If enacted the primary legislation should become:2.2.1 "Human Trafficking, Exploitation and Modern Slavery Act 2014″3.0 PREAMBLE3.1 This ought to be changed to:3.1.1 "A BILL to Make provision about slavery, servitude, exploitation and forced or compulsory labour;to make provision about human trafficking; to make provision for an Anti-slavery Commissioner; and forconnected purposes related to adults and children"4.0 Section 1(2)4.1 This is particularly problematic for a number of reasons. Section 1 currently defines slavery inaccordance with Article 4 of the Human Rights Convention (HRC) [1] however Article 4 doesn’t actuallydefine slavery in sufficient detail therefore it is not possible to construe section 1 in accordance with Article4 of the HRC in any meaningful way, leaving this Modern Slavery Bill 2014 without a clear definition ofslavery.4.2 Article 4 reads as follows:4.2.1 "Prohibition of slavery and forced labour1. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.2. No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.3. For the purpose of this Article the term "forced or compulsory labour" shall not include:(a) any work required to be done in the ordinary course of detention imposed according to the provisions ofArticle 5 of this Convention or during conditional release fromsuch detention;(b) any service of a military character or, in case of conscientious objectors in countries where they arerecognised, service exacted instead of compulsory military service;(c) any service exacted in case of an emergency or calamity threatening the life or well-being of thecommunity;(d) any work or service which forms part of normal civic obligations."Given the inadequate definition of slavery and servitude it is, in my view, likely that the cases which will berecognised or dealt with will be the headline-grabbing ones, well publicised in the media, rather than themajority of cases where the evidence may be somewhat weaker or the cases themselves may not be asheadline-grabbing. It is therefore likely to be the case that professionals may still not recognise cases they aredealing with as ‘slavery’ or other offences dealt with under this proposed legislation. Although this Bill isclearly intended to be a criminal Bill it is important that there is consistency with civil protection rights for1/6/2020 Modern Slavery Bill (2nd September 2014)https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmpublic/modernslavery/memo/ms05.htm 3/4children, such as under the Children Act 1989, such that the cases where evidence is weaker, but children arestill at risk, are properly dealt with.4.3 At present the Bill is far too vague and I would prefer a clear definition of slavery or servitude to beincluded within it, for example as shown below:4.3.1 "the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right ofownership are exercised" (Siliadin v. France, § 122).4.3.2 "a particularly serious form of denial of freedom" including "in addition to the obligation toperform certain services for others … the obligation for the [person] to live on another person’s propertyand the impossibility of altering his condition" (Siliadin v. France, § 123).5.0 Section 1(4)5.1 This should be revised to include an explicit statement about persons who may have a disability. Isuggest rewording as follows:5.1.1 (4) For example, regard may be had to any of the person’s personal circumstances (such as theirage, family relationships, the presence of any disability, and any mental or physical illness) which maymake the person more vulnerable than other persons.5.2 As an aside, and I do not know how to deal with this in suggested re-wording, it is my view that thosepeople who are aged under 18 are almost certainly always more vulnerable than most other persons so I am alittle uneasy about the potential inference which could stem from Section 1(4) that people of a young agemay not always be vulnerable.5.3 I would prefer this section to make clear that persons below the age of 18 are vulnerable, for a wholevariety of reasons, and hope you will be able to find an alternative form of words to highlight this.6.0 Section 3(2)6.1 This is too weak. It refers back to section 1 which, as discussed above, is non-specific. Section 3therefore needs tightening. This could be resolved by revising Section 1 as described above. As currentlyworded it will be difficult for professionals to know whether or not the behaviour is slavery or servitude andit will be difficult for appropriate guidance to be developed which is consistent across England and Wales.Consistency is incredibly important in child protection cases and, if for that reason alone, Section 1 and, byreference, Section 3 ought to be more fully detailed.7.0 Section 3(6)(a)7.1 This must have a definition of ‘young’ to make explicitly clear that the definition of a child is someonewho has not reached their 18th birthday in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.7.2 I suggest rewording this section as follows:7.2.1 (a) he or she is mentally or physically ill or disabled, is young (aged under 18 years of age) or has afamily relationship with a particular person, and8.0 Section 48.1 Unfortunately this section currently just applies to "trafficking" and excludes "exploitation, slavery,servitude and forced or compulsory labour". This Section therefore ought to refer not just to Section 2, as itdoes currently, but to Sections 1 and 3 as well.9.0 Section 15(3)9.1 This Section cross-references Schedule 2 which purely deals with trafficking. This section needs to be re-worded and re-cross-referenced so that it includes proper references to all of the definitions of offences setout in the proposed revised Title I have set out above.1/6/2020 Modern Slavery Bill (2nd September 2014)https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmpublic/modernslavery/memo/ms05.htm 4/410.0 Section 35(2)10.1 This is too weak. At present the provision of information, education or training is optional under thissection. This must to be changed such that the provision of information and standardised educational ortraining material(s) is mandatory in order that duplication of effort at a regional or local level is minimisedand so that standardisation of education and training across England and Wales is more likely to befacilitated.11.0 Section 3911.1 This needs to be tightened to cross reference Section 2 (and not just 1 and 3).12.0 Sections 42(1)(a), 42(1)(b) and 42(1)(c)12.1 These need to be revised to include exploitation as at present the mandatory guidance under this sectionapplies purely to trafficking and slavery.13.0 Section 43(3)13.1 This needs to be revised to include exploitation, servitude and slavery (not just trafficking).14.0 Section 4414.1 This section is too unclear – it needs to explicitly state whether or not the National Health Service is oneof these public authorities or if the definition is to be released by another legal means. There are argumentsfor and against including the NHS here – but that is a separate discussion15.0 I hope The Committee members find the above submission helpful – please do not hesitate to contactme if I can be of any more assistance.Professor Andrew Graeme RowlandBMedSci (Hons) BMBS (Hons) MFMLM MAcadMEd FCEM FRCPCH FRSA27 July 2014[1] http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/html/005.htm©Parliamentary copyrightPrepared 2nd September 2014Footer linksA-Z indexGlossaryContact usFreedom of InformationJobsUsing this websiteCopyright

Written evidence submitted by Dr Andrew Rowland to the Public Bill Committee regarding the Modern Slavery Bill

http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/56134/3/Modern%20Slavery%20Bill%20%282nd%20September%202014%29.pdf

Written evidence submitted by Dr Andrew Rowland to the Public Bill Committee regarding the Modern Slavery Bill

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Salford Institutional Repository